Another ruling thread

[TL900]

the 500 chips and the 5k chips are a completely different colour, seems a pretty clear rookie mistake on callers part imo ship the 6k

[RED-DOG]

According to the TD, no one announced the bet size and the villain did not say 'call', he just dropped 1500 in and the hero immediately flipped his cards over.

Villain claimed it was a genuine mistake and he would never have called 6000.

The TD's view was that both parties should take some responsibility.

Hero should not open his hand until he is sure the bet has been called. As it was there was no verbal call declaration and not enough money had been put in to the pot.

[redsimon]

the 500 chips and the 5k chips are a completely different colour, seems a pretty clear rookie mistake on callers part imo ship the 6k

Pretty similar colours in the lighting. Seen 5K and 500 chips misplayed before tbh.

[Boba Fett]

According to the TD, no one announced the bet size and the villain did not say 'call', he just dropped 1500 in and the hero immediately flipped his cards over.

Villain claimed it was a genuine mistake and he would never have called 6000.

The TD's view was that both parties should take some responsibility.

Hero should not open his hand until he is sure the bet has been called. As it was there was no verbal call declaration and not enough money had been put in to the pot.

ridiculous ruling.  If a chip goes over the line its a call, doesnt matter the denomination

[celtic]

hmmm its obv reasonable that he thought your bet was 1500 rather than the large overbet.  There is a rule that covers this kind of thing in nl games:

 Because the amount of a wager at big-bet poker has such a wide range, a player who has taken action based on a gross misunderstanding of the amount wagered needs some protection. A bettor should not show down a hand until the amount put into the pot for a call seems reasonably correct, or it is obvious that the caller understands the amount wagered. The decision-maker is allowed considerable discretion in ruling on this type of situation. A possible rule-of-thumb is to disallow any claim of not understanding the amount wagered if the caller has put eighty percent or more of that amount into the pot.

Example: On the end, a player puts a $500 chip into the pot and says softly, “Four hundred.” The opponent puts a $100 chip into the pot and says, “Call.” The bettor immediately shows the hand. The dealer says, “He bet four hundred.” The caller says, “Oh, I thought he bet a hundred.” In this case, the recommended ruling normally is that the bettor had an obligation to not show the hand when the amount put into the pot was obviously short, and the “call” can be retracted. Note that the character of each player can be a factor. (Unfortunately, situations can arise at big-bet poker that are not so clear-cut as this.)

Good balance there.

There is no doubt that the Hero has SOME culpability here. It is wrong to automatically assume (I am aware of the modern fashion which Guy mentioned, but it is not enshrined in the rules afaik) ) that when the guy chucked 1,500 in, he was calling the full bet. Always best to clarify first, & we must accept SOME responsibility here.

All a bit unfortunate really, but no big deal. The blame is not wholly with the villain, imo.

Thanks for the post doubleup! it does sums up the situation I totally agree Tikay,  that the mistake on my part is not saying "6k" when I bet the amount. Lesson learnt! Still dont understand this concept of "not understanding the bet wagered"
[/quot

Vinodh, you have no obligation to say how much you are betting in this instance.

@ doubleup, I hadn't read the ruling, I have now, and just don't get how this is fair.

Last week I bet 26k on the flop, villain announced all in, which was for 62k total. I didn't say anything, just slid some 500 chips over and turned my hand over, the guy turned his hand over, the dealer just dealt the turn and river. I lost, can I now say I thought it was only another 5k?

[Pinchop73]

lol live poker

[outragous76]

According to the TD, no one announced the bet size and the villain did not say 'call', he just dropped 1500 in and the hero immediately flipped his cards over.

Villain claimed it was a genuine mistake and he would never have called 6000.

The TD's view was that both parties should take some responsibility.

Hero should not open his hand until he is sure the bet has been called. As it was there was no verbal call declaration and not enough money had been put in to the pot.

ridiculous ruling.  If a chip goes over the line its a call, doesnt matter the denomination

Horrific ruling! Angling season is upon us! Dtd the clarify IMO

[doubleup]

@celtic

hopefully sorted your quotefail.  

If you read that rule (which may or may not be used at DtD), there is clearly a lot of discretion involved.  This example and your other example are simply not credible "gross misunderstandings".  It is also interesting imo that OP "immediately" turned over his hand exactly as in the example in the quoted rule.  

The rule I quoted is there to protect players from being angleshot (not for a moment suggesting that OP was doing this) and from what I know of the TDs at DtD there is no chance that this or any similar rule that allows discretion would be capable of being used by players to gain an advantage.

edit quotefail terminal 

[celtic]

@celtic

hopefully sorted your quotefail.  

If you read that rule (which may or may not be used at DtD), there is clearly a lot of discretion involved.  This example and your other example are simply not credible "gross misunderstandings".  It is also interesting imo that OP "immediately" turned over his hand exactly as in the example in the quoted rule.  

The rule I quoted is there to protect players from being angleshot (not for a moment suggesting that OP was doing this) and from what I know of the TDs at DtD there is no chance that this or any similar rule that allows discretion would be capable of being used by players to gain an advantage.

edit quotefail terminal 

I'm the worst at quoting when on a phone

Can someone explain to me how that rule protects the villain from angle shooting?

As far as I can work out, vinodh made a legit bet, the villain said call, threw some chips in, that didn't add up to the bet, saw he had lost, then said he thought it was only 1500.

[relaedgc]

Don't like it, personally.

I think that rule opens up a far greater amount of potential angle shooting than it protects from.

To be honest, putting chips in to the pot when facing a bet is an intent to call. In my opinion, there's more justification for chip to be returned if the dealer announces a wrong amount than the situation presented in OP.

But they have their own rules, and I am not versed in them to comment further.

[I KNOW IT]

The call should be 6k, its covered by the accepted action rule within the TDA rules which are most commonly used rules around the world.

The responsibility is on the caller to know what the bet is, he can ask the player or the dealer.

Im on my phone so cannot fully quote the "accepted action " rule but it is there to cover such instances.

[Tal]

I can see the logic of the ruling in this case and I think there should always be a "common sense clause" to enable TDs to make sensible decisions.

However...

...I'd be annoyed if I lost 6k on the river as the villain in this case. Jolly annoyed at myself for not seeing how much the hero had bet.

[I KNOW IT]

I can see the logic of the ruling in this case and I think there should always be a "common sense clause" to enable TDs to make sensible decisions.

However...

...I'd be annoyed if I lost 6k on the river as the villain in this case. Jolly annoyed at myself for not seeing how much the hero had bet.

There is a "common sense" rule it comes under Rule 1 of the TDA .

I can't see how the bettor is held responsible here? He has placed his bet out clearly , he does not have to announce anything. The responsibilty is totally on the caller in this instance. The oppurtunities for angle shooting would be great if he wasn't made to call the full 6K

[Karabiner]

There is one chip-set at DTD where the 5k chips are purple and I once failed to notice that a player was using his last one as a card-protector on a red deck and wrongly assumed that he was all in so I exposed my hand.

If one of those purple 5k chips was directly under a 1k chip I could understand him mistakenly thinking that there must have been a red 500 chip underneath and that the bet was 1500.

The TD's job is to ultimately give what he thinks is a fair ruling not to adhere strictly to the letter of the law come hell or high water as that is when bad rulings occur, so I'm assuming that the TD knows the guy who made the mistake and considers him to be a straight up guy and the mistake to be genuine.

[david3103]

There is one chip-set at DTD where the 5k chips are purple and I once failed to notice that a player was using his last one as a card-protector on a red deck and wrongly assumed that he was all in so I exposed my hand.

If one of those purple 5k chips was directly under a 1k chip I could understand him mistakenly thinking that there must have been a red 500 chip underneath and that the bet was 1500.

The TD's job is to ultimately give what he thinks is a fair ruling not to adhere strictly to the letter of the law come hell or high water as that is when bad rulings occur, so I'm assuming that the TD knows the guy who made the mistake and considers him to be a straight up guy and the mistake to be genuine.

How about if the TD doesn't know him? He could still be a straight up guy who made a genuine mistake but now we're saying that the TD can make a decision based on his personal knowledge of the player?

That's a pretty dangerous road to take.